Wednesday, November 20, 2013

The bishop of Springfield, Illinois will lead prayers of exorcism “in reparation for the sin of same-sex marriage” at his cathedral on November 20 as Governor Pat Quinn signs a state law redefining marriage.

“Pope Francis is saying that same-sex 'marriage' comes from the devil and should be condemned as such,” said Bishop Paprocki in a statement Thursday.

Illinois’ House of Representatives passed the same-sex “marriage” bill in a 61-54 vote on November 5, sending it to Quinn’s desk for approval. The governor had already pledged to sign it.

The day after the vote, the Chicago Tribune quoted two Catholic state representatives who cited Pope Francis’ famous “who am I to judge?” quote in explaining their decision to support the measure.

"As a Catholic follower of Jesus and the pope, Pope Francis, I am clear that our Catholic religious doctrine has at its core love, compassion and justice for all people,” said Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia.

In his statement, Bishop Paprocki called out those Catholic politicians who “twisted the words of the pope” and said Catholics who voted for the bill are "morally complicit as co-operators in facilitating this grave sin."

7 comments:

It's interest than the Bishop is having a service of reparation utilizing the prayers of exorcism to mark the legalization of same-sex marriage while no similar services have been offered in reparation for unjust wars/military interventions, or our general ambivalence of the mistreatment of undocumented persons, poor liturgy, gun/gang violence.

So the alternative is to not confront moral evils? This is an Illinois specific event, his state has not issued military interventions, the federal government has but wouldn't federal matters fall under the jurisdiction of the USCCB? Similar with the other vague items on your list. Shouldn't he be focused on the events occurring in his diocese under his auspices? I'm sure you are a seamless garment follower, but in this case it's not about which issues are addressed and which are not but what specific events triggered a response.

There is little point in wasting time explaining natural law, much less catholic doctrine, to the likes of TAq and Anonymous.

It would be far better, though, for Paprocki to actually perform the exorcism outside the IL legislative building, the governors mansion, and the IL Supreme Court. There was a lot of success with that outside the Rockford abortion clinic.

Wuerl should be assigning priests (as well as himself) to do this at least weekly outside Congress, the WH, and SCOTUS. But our bishops think in natural terms now, and no longer in supernatural terms.

You assume that I disagree with the church's explanation of natural law; that's a bold presumption.

There a risk to alienating pro-life and doctrinal allies by assuming, which as the saying goes, "Makes an ass out of you an me."

You want an local issues? Fine; where were the clergy (and the laity) when Illinois shut down several state psychiatric hospitals and de-funded their assertive community treatment programs, relegating some of the most vulnerable of our society to destitution and psychosis on the streets of our cities?

Don't make presumptions about my orthodoxy and orthopraxy because you've got a sharp tongue and feel outraged. These are real social, moral, and spiritual concerns that shouldn't be ignored or de-prioritized. If one of the church's missions is to confront moral evils, shouldn't we be more consistent?

I said nothing about any disagreement on your part; I said it was a waste of time to try and explain it to you.

Why? A bishop makes the first concrete *action* against an abomination in our society of *any* US bishop, and you react by trotting out a social justice agenda. Whether you are willing to recognize it or not, there are cracks in your formation. Clearly you have trouble understanding the concept of the hierarchy of goods and truth and the difference between absolute moral evils and prudential judgments of the State.

A perusal of your previous posts shows a definite flavoring of what one might call "squishiness" in certain areas. In particular, you were whining on another post about being criticized for your "Christ has no body" prayer affectation. In spite of being attributed by some to Teresa of Avila, it does not show up in her writings, sounds distinctly anti-Teresan, is completely out of character for 16th century Spain, but does just happen to appeal emotionally to feel-good social justice advocates. It denies the bodily resurrection and the Real Presence of the *Body*, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ "now on earth" in the Eucharist. I find it particularly obnoxious when it gets inserted as an Offertory hymn between the Creed on one hand and the Consecration on the other.

If you think I've erred in my evaluation, I'd suggest you be clearer and more precise in the future.

Comments

Benedict

Benedict, while the "father of the new liturgical movement" (in my estimation at any rate), is not the new liturgical movement; as such the new liturgical movement does not die with the end of his papacy.